Bruce Davidson on how he did Subway

[r.e.]

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2011/dec/01/train-thought-subway-photographs/

The NYC subway sure has changed.

[johnmsanderson]

great article, thanks. Davidson's work makes me nostalgic for a time in NYC I wish I could have photographed...

[dperez]

I enjoyed reading this. Makes me want to buy the book.

-DP

[Michael Alpert]

great article, thanks. Davidson's work makes me nostalgic for a time in NYC I wish I could have photographed...

I'm not sure if you read the essay to its conclusion. Davidson was mugged. He felt, with good reason, that he was working in dangerous conditions. It wasn't like East 100th Street, where he became known in the neighborhood. I lived in the Lower East Side in the 1960s. As far as I am concerned, only people who were not there could possibly be nostalgic about that terribly violent time, which lasted well into the 1980s. If you were poor, and sometimes even if you were not poor, The Big Apple offered you a lot of misery.

[johnmsanderson]

Heya,

I was born and raised in NYC, as well as my two sisters who are over 15 years older than me. I'm well aware of the history here. I remember the hookers and drug dealers on 42nd, I saw a guy get stabbed when I was walking home from school with my mother on 8th ave and 43rd, bleeding all over the place. I could go on. We didn't exactly grow up on Sutton Place. You don't have to remind me about what NYC was like. :) Of course those outside of big cities seem to have an xenophobia of the city than what actually exists -- goes back to white flight in the 50s/60s.

The thing Davidson's photos capture just strike a chord in me (as well as my childhood memories of NY) that I find visually striking compared to how antiseptic the subway can be these days. Yeah it was "more violent" during the 70's and early 80's but you make it sound like Baghdad. You'd think all those tall model looking women and old ladies in Bruce's photos would have avoided it altogether...

And don't be fooled if you think you can't get your camera jacked these days either. :) There is still incredible violence in the city as the capital investment is only going towards places where there is a clear return on the investment, as the poor are exploited to make room for people who can pay higher rent. Just sayin', don't fall asleep on certains lines after certain hours.

When did you skip town?

[r.e.]

I enjoyed reading this. Makes me want to buy the book.

-DP

You might also consider the three volume collection of his work that was recently published. Expensive, but worth it.

[r.e.]

I lived in the Lower East Side in the 1960s. As far as I am concerned, only people who were not there could possibly be nostalgic about that terribly violent time, which lasted well into the 1980s. If you were poor, and sometimes even if you were not poor, The Big Apple offered you a lot of misery.

Michael,

A friend who lived in the Lower East Side in the late 60s/early 70s told me at the time that it was a pretty safe area because it was run by bikers and nobody did anything without permission. Is that true?

On the other hand, about a year after he told me this, he wound up in an intensive care unit after being beaten within an inch of his life with a baseball bat. But I suspect that that happened, not because of random violence, but because he was at the time heavily into drugs and failed to pay some dealer on time.

I'm interested in what Davidson says about the technical side of these photographs. In particular, I'm surprised that he was using flash and that he suggests that the vast majority of the photographs, although not all, were taken after asking the subject's permission, which means that most of them are posed or close to it.

The new Magnum book full of contact sheets probably shows some of his work, and consequently what film he was using. I'm interested now in seeing what the film was, and what speed it was. And also what comes before and after the photographs that he selected.

[Michael Alpert]

Michael,

A friend who lived in the Lower East Side in the late 60s/early 70s told me at the time that it was a pretty safe area because it was run by bikers and nobody did anything without permission. Is that true?

On the other hand, about a year after he told me this, he wound up in an intensive care unit after being beaten within an inch of his life with a baseball bat. But I suspect that that happened, not because of random violence, but because he was at the time heavily into drugs and failed to pay some dealer on time.

I'm interested in what Davidson says about the technical side of these photographs. In particular, I'm surprised that he was using flash and that he suggests that the vast majority of the photographs, although not all, were taken after asking the subject's permission, which means that most of them are posed or close to it.

The new Magnum book full of contact sheets probably shows some of his work, and consequently what film he was using. I'm interested now in seeing what the film was, and what speed it was. And also what comes before and after the photographs that he selected.



1. "Is that true?" No, every kind of mayhem that you can think of (and mayhem that you probably would not think of) was there in force. Drugs were certainly a large part of the problem, as they are today. But, just as significant, open racism and Vietnam poisoned American culture in the 1960s. There was a lot of greatness in N.Y. at that time, but there was also a lot of fear. The statistics on murders and other violent crimes tell, more or less objectively, what the poorer neighborhoods were like. I eventually moved to an apartment in a building at the south end of the Village that, I was told, was owned by the Mafia. I did feel quite safe inside the building, and I always paid my rent!

2. Davidson's technique. It doesn't surprise me that Davidson used flash or that he asked permission. He used flash because he needed to, especially with color film. And earlier, when he was on East 100th Street, he always asked permission. His relationship with the people around him led to some great photographs. As much as I like the work of Cartier-Bresson, Robert Frank, and other street photographers, I question their insistence on isolating themselves from their subjects. Davidson's interaction seems more adult. Still, I am thankful that photography allows for a great range of techniques and working practices.

3. I recommend the three-volume retrospective set of Davidson's work, though I am not sure if it is still in print and what its price is. I bought a copy when it was first published and Davidson was attending a small exhibit of his work here in Maine.

[Tobias Key]

I'm not sure if you read the essay to its conclusion. Davidson was mugged. He felt, with good reason, that he was working in dangerous conditions. It wasn't like East 100th Street, where he became known in the neighborhood. I lived in the Lower East Side in the 1960s. As far as I am concerned, only people who were not there could possibly be nostalgic about that terribly violent time, which lasted well into the 1980s. If you were poor, and sometimes even if you were not poor, The Big Apple offered you a lot of misery.

I read somewhere that if you were black, under 25 and living in certain areas of New York in the late sixties, being called up to fight in Vietnam actually raised your life expectancy. Don't know if it's true but a pretty damning statistic if it is.

[dperez]

Thanks, I will look into that.


You might also consider the three volume collection of his work that was recently published. Expensive, but worth it.

[GabrielSeri]

Thanks r.e. I'm a big Bruce Davidson fan and I also remember the NY from the 70s and 80s. Born in Manhatten but grew up in Queens, Ozone Park. Had a huge culture clash when we moved to LA in the late 80s. Bruce is a great writer as well.

[r.e.]

Thanks r.e. I'm a big Bruce Davidson fan and I also remember the NY from the 70s and 80s. Born in Manhatten but grew up in Queens, Ozone Park. Had a huge culture clash when we moved to LA in the late 80s. Bruce is a great writer as well.

When in New York, I stay in Jackson Heights. There's a move right now to turn the old rail line from Rego Park to Ozone Park into a park like they did with the High Line in Manhattan: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-12-02/news/30469714_1_high-line-greenway-community-board

[cyrus]

What's interesting to me as a 15-year resident of NYC coming from California is the persistence of the image of NYC as a place of endless street crime (I have witness one very bungled attempt at pickpocketting here, and that's it, in 15 years!)

When friends and relatives visit me, it takes some coaxing to get them on the subway. They assume that the muggers are all still there, from the 1970s, just waiting. Once, I was sitting in a Starbucks in fancy Soho, when an obvious tourist came up to me and asked whether she could share my table for fear of the marauding hordes of "muggers" who may be waiting outside. As hard as I tried, she just could not accept that the real muggings go on quite legally in the facy boutiques that lined the streets and sold $300 jeans. LOL

[Michael Alpert]

cyrus,

Many people, myself included, are very thankful for the cultural change in American cities. New York, Chicago, and other cities are much much safer. So your remarks are understandable. Still, here in Maine, I occasionally meet tourists from N.Y. who are fearful of wilderness. They think bears attack people on a regular basis. (Bears are actually almost never seen because they run when they sense that people are anywhere nearby.) When I explain that there is absolutely nothing in the Maine woods to worry about, these city-dwellers think that I am either totally naive or very brave. It sometimes takes a bit of time for them to become accustomed to the absence of people and the abundance of nature, so I appreciate their emotional needs. The woman you encountered was obviously in unfamiliar territory. Soho was her wilderness. I sympathize with her.

[cyrus]

Soho was her wilderness. I sympathize with her.

I of course also sympathize with her too. In fact as someone who has a studio across the river in New Jersey (only minutes away from the heart of NYC) I see the bias of New Yorkers with respect to anything past the Hudson!

This sort of thing is part of a much larger cultural conflict. Since the Biblical days, cities have been characterized as places of evil and danger (think Babylon, Sodom and Gommorah.) Remember the ad for salsa where the actors expressed amazement that the competing brand was "Made in New York City!???!!!!!"

And on the other hand city dwellers have often looked askance at country folk - how many movies have you seen where innocent city dweller driving through some nameless state is accosted by creepy local yokels who are crazed gun-totting mass murderers and tell him to "squeal like a pig" etc.

[r.e.]

What's interesting to me as a 15-year resident of NYC coming from California is the persistence of the image of NYC as a place of endless street crime (I have witness one very bungled attempt at pickpocketting here, and that's it, in 15 years!)

New York is not as blissful as you suggest.

If in 15 years you have seen nothing more than a bungled pickpocket attempt, you are very lucky.

In my neighbourhood, the police have recently started using a crane that allows them to see up and down the street. A few months ago, a man was beaten to death, on the street, with a baseball bat five blocks from where I live, and last week someone fired two shots at police officers who approached him, about five blocks away, in broad daylight.

The person with whom I stay in New York, and who has lived here for twelve years, works on the Upper East Side, which as you know is in general the wealthiest part of the city, and he says that he has witnessed several muggings there in broad daylight.

On top of this, there is the whole issue of Guiliani's approach to crime and what it has done to certain neighbourhoods, starting with Harlem, and how poor people have been pushed out of the city. If you have been in New York for 15 years, you also know all about the halfway house guys who were required to wear blue uniforms in public while they were required, in order to get some income, to spend their days emptying garbage cans.

As someone who has lived in New York regularly, and at times for long periods, since 1978, I think that it is fair to say that the crime rate in the city has decreased significantly; but as part of the policies associated with crime reduction, a lot of poor people have been forced out, and crime continues to be a significant issue.

Maybe it's your California or privileged lawyer background, but your flippant comments about New York crime, and smart remarks about a woman from outside the city who might have concerns about it, mostly demonstrate that either you are living in a bubble or have no understanding of the history/current reality, and have no understanding of the relationship between New York crime prevention policies and the state of the poor in this city.

[r.e.]

Heya,

I was born and raised in NYC, as well as my two sisters who are over 15 years older than me. I'm well aware of the history here. I remember the hookers and drug dealers on 42nd, I saw a guy get stabbed when I was walking home from school with my mother on 8th ave and 43rd, bleeding all over the place. I could go on. We didn't exactly grow up on Sutton Place. You don't have to remind me about what NYC was like. :) Of course those outside of big cities seem to have an xenophobia of the city than what actually exists -- goes back to white flight in the 50s/60s.

The thing Davidson's photos capture just strike a chord in me (as well as my childhood memories of NY) that I find visually striking compared to how antiseptic the subway can be these days. Yeah it was "more violent" during the 70's and early 80's but you make it sound like Baghdad. You'd think all those tall model looking women and old ladies in Bruce's photos would have avoided it altogether...

And don't be fooled if you think you can't get your camera jacked these days either. :) There is still incredible violence in the city as the capital investment is only going towards places where there is a clear return on the investment, as the poor are exploited to make room for people who can pay higher rent. Just sayin', don't fall asleep on certains lines after certain hours.

When did you skip town?

John, the truth is that you aren't old enough to know how bad it was. Union Square, now vibrant and the site of New York's most important Greenmarket, was at the time mostly boarded up and a centre for drug addicts. The city was on the verge of bankruptcy, and significant parts of the subway system were indeed dangerous. At the time, I did wander around dodgy parts of New York without worrying about personal safety, but that may have had a lot to do with youthful stupidity.

That said, I had no safety concerns in many parts of the city. But the reality is that I was much more wary in New York than cities like London and Paris, and even Marseielle and Barcelona, which close to the waterfront, at least, were pretty rough places.

But I will never forget one particular trip to New York. The Iranians had taken many Americans hostage, and it had come out a couple of days before I got to New York (it had been a closely guarded secret, including by the media) that the country of which I am a citizen had spirited a lot of the Americans out of Iran. So when I went to buy a ticket to see Richard Gere in Bent, a play that was both controversial and largely sold out, and that was a huge risk for Gere (he had just come off An Officer and a Gentleman, which made him a star, and people wondered whether he could actually act, and the play was about homosexual inmates in a Nazi concentration camp), when I showed my Passport to verify my Traveller's Cheques (remember those?), I suddenly got centre seats about ten rows back from the stage. And when I went to Peach, the bar at the Beekman Tower where I was staying, and Truman Capote's favourite hangout, I got a bill at the end of the night that was a small fraction of what my friend and I had drunk. And it was the same for the whole week that we were in New York. The downside? The terrific young New Yorker that we met that week who was afraid, really afraid, to say that he was Iranian.

I have mixed feelings about New York at that time, but the bottom line is that the rough times in New York are when I grew to love the city.

[cyrus]

R.E. no one made any "flippant" comments about anything, nor is this some deep sociological discussion about crime or poverty, nor do you have the slightest knowledge about my priv ileged background, so calm down. The indisputable fact, and the point you apparently missed, is that crime in NYC is now far less than it was when this fellow was takibg his photos of the NYC subway, and far far less than portrayed in mass culture. So kindly remove whatever chip you have on your shoulder, or dont as I dont care. Frankly i miss the old city - it had more of an edge to it, more drama.

[r.e.]

Frankly i miss the old city - it had more of an edge to it, more drama.

Coming from someone who says that he got here in 1986 or 87, that is truly funny. The rest isn't worth a response.

[Michael Alpert]

I have mixed feelings about New York at that time, but the bottom line is that the rough times in New York are when I grew to love the city.

r.e.,

Yes, this paradox about N. Y. is important. It doesn't lend itself to resolution. And the tension within it can be a source of creative energy. Many of Bruce Davidson's photographs seem to express this enigma. It really is both irreconcilable and understandable that the experience of fear can lead to a deeper understanding of our essential humanity.

[rdenney]

Maybe it's your California or privileged lawyer background, but your flippant comments about New York crime, and smart remarks about a woman from outside the city who might have concerns about it, mostly demonstrate that either you are living in a bubble or have no understanding of the history/current reality, and have no understanding of the relationship between New York crime prevention policies and the state of the poor in this city.

Hey, dude, ease up. There are many dangerous places in the world, and people are much more afraid of the dangers they don't know about and understand than they are about the ones they grew up with. That doesn't mean both aren't still dangerous.

There is no honor in bragging about a city in terms of the terrors we endured, not knowing how bad it was.

I live in rural Virginia now and work (when I'm not traveling) in Baltimore. I've ridden public transportation in every major city in the country. We have friends from urban parts of the DC area that are deeply afraid to come to our house in the country, simply because it's too dark and they don't know what's hiding in that darkness. I have a colleague who grew up in south central LA and he's afraid to stay in downtown Baltimore. There are routes in Baltimore I used to take that I don't any more, simply because the risk if I have a flat or break down (which can happen on glass-covered streets with pavements rough enough to justify a Jeep) is just too great. The local folks in the office warned me about my direct route--they live here and they are afraid to take that route.

Did anybody blame the poor for being poor? I did see some blaming of the rich for being rich. Bad behavior knows no economic class, of course, but people with nothing to lose are more likely to express their bad behavior in desperate ways. It is reasonable to want to avoid getting in the way of such bad behavior. That avoidance does not mean that the person has no compassion, or does not do what they can to improve the world they live in. You should not make that assumption, which seems built into the comment I quoted.

I personally would not want to photograph in the New York subways as Davidson did, simply because one thing I learned growing up in a city is that city dwellers know how to build a protective space around themselves, and it's simply rude to intrude on that space. There are people who can do it--my wife is such--but I'm not one of them. I would therefore make a poor street photographer.

I went to a college that attracts people from rural areas and small towns, and it was quite a shock to realize that these country folk had no sense of personal space and made no effort to preserve it. It frankly unnerved me at first. The willingness of people to pry into that space offended me, and really it still does a bit even decades later. By the same token, that space can be a little too impenetrable, such as when a person in the city is in trouble and nobody will come to their aid as they would in a small town.

I've wandered around some really great cities, including New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, London, Copenhagen, Guadalajara,Tokyo, and even Sao Paulo, among many others. Of these, contrasting London and New York seems to me most interesting. London has a human scale to it, as if it was designed by normal-sized persons who walk around on their own feet. New York, by comparison, looks as though it was designed by giants. Everything has outgrown the human scale. A person can feel like a person in London, but in New York a person feels very small indeed. It is intimidating, and being intimidated by it is a reasonable response. By the same token, I can see how people would come to love it, the same way, say, West Virginians feel secure in their steep rural hollows that would be claustrophobic to flatlanders. One can feel very private in New York, even in the middle of a crowd.

As a young adult (not too distant from the time Davidson was making these photographs), I traveled to Washington for the first time. I was on a limited budget and was staying in a cheap chain hotel on New York Avenue in Northeast. Definitely not a good neighborhood! Nobody knew what "gentrification" meant in those days. I had spent the day photographing on the Washington Mall--just typical tourist stuff--with my Canon F-1. I thought I'd save on the cab fare and walk back to my hotel. What's a couple of miles? I went about ten blocks, stopped in a McDonalds for a burger, and realized that my camera was attracting all sorts of attention. Should I have just ignored the hair on the back of my neck standing on end as a typical paranoid tourist reaction? Even the paranoid can be the victims of those who wish to do them harm. I took a cab.

Rick "thinking Davidson's great photographs should spur open and calm discussion, not prejudice and insults" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

I'm reminded of being a young nerdy 11-year old farm kid who talked my Dad into taking me to a model rocketry meet at MIT (Boston). This was in the early 1970s. Hopeful of creating the next Werner Von Braun, he agreed (I was quite the geek). During the meet we gave a ride to a kid from Canada who was visibly anxious so we asked him why he was so nervous? He told us that he had never been to a big dangerous American city and he was scared of all the crime. My Dad went on to explain that the News tends to exaggerate the violence and things really aren't so bad. He was at a stop light explaining this when a car bumped us from behind and a rabid, drug-induced yipee-hippee with wild eyes and crazy hair jumped out of the care and stuck his arms into my Dad's open window, choking him and screaming, "You mo-fo hit my car!"

Dad simply rolled up the window and drove out into the intersection, dragging him along and speeding up until his tumbling release.

Dad was awesome. Although he didn't finish his explanation of how the Press tends to exaggerate the crime and violence in America.

[cyrus]

Coming from someone who says that he got here in 1986 or 87, that is truly funny. The rest isn't worth a response.

Fuck off.

[Merg Ross]

Fuck off.

The Ignore List also works.

[cyrus]

The Ignore List also works.

YEs but we New Yorkers enjoy dropping the F bomb.

[Ken Lee]

Closing the thread. Getting nasty.

[Ken Lee]

Opening the thread again. Prosecutors will be violated - err, I mean violators will be banned.

[Jay DeFehr]

Opening the thread again. Prosecutors will be violated - err, I mean violators will be banned.

I suspect this could have a chilling effect, assuming anyone worries about being banned.

It reminds me of a joke Julia recently told me:

The communist party leaders met to hear comrade Lenin speak, and as he was about to begin, someone in the audience sneezed. "Who sneezed?" citizen Lenin demanded, but no one replied. "Everyone in the front row stand up" he ordered. He repeated his question to the standing row, and again there was no reply. "Shoot them" he ordered the guards, who obeyed without hesitation. Lenin ordered the second row to stand, and repeated his question. Again no reply, and again he ordered them shot. When he repeated his question to the third row, a man in the back replied, "I sneezed, comrade", to which Lenin replied, "Bless you".

[Jim Jones]

Thank you, Ken, for reopening the thread. It has been illuminating for someone like me who once visited NYC briefly 1963. The actions of a few forum participants shouldn't deprive the rest of us of a horizon expanding experience.

[Ken Lee]

Excellent joke, Komrade :)

The reference to banning appeared because of a brief episode of what me might call "in-flight turbulence" - which is now behind us.

Feel free to move about the cabin, and enjoy the flight. ;)

[r.e.]

r.e.,

Yes, this paradox about N. Y. is important. It doesn't lend itself to resolution. And the tension within it can be a source of creative energy. Many of Bruce Davidson's photographs seem to express this enigma. It really is both irreconcilable and understandable that the experience of fear can lead to a deeper understanding of our essential humanity.

Hi Michael, yes I think that I also see that in some if his work, but didn't have the words to express it as well as you have.

[r.e.]

Hey, dude, ease up. There are many dangerous places in the world, and people are much more afraid of the dangers they don't know about and understand than they are about the ones they grew up with. That doesn't mean both aren't still dangerous.

There is no honor in bragging about a city in terms of the terrors we endured, not knowing how bad it was.

I live in rural Virginia now and work (when I'm not traveling) in Baltimore. I've ridden public transportation in every major city in the country. We have friends from urban parts of the DC area that are deeply afraid to come to our house in the country, simply because it's too dark and they don't know what's hiding in that darkness. I have a colleague who grew up in south central LA and he's afraid to stay in downtown Baltimore. There are routes in Baltimore I used to take that I don't any more, simply because the risk if I have a flat or break down (which can happen on glass-covered streets with pavements rough enough to justify a Jeep) is just too great. The local folks in the office warned me about my direct route--they live here and they are afraid to take that route.

Did anybody blame the poor for being poor? I did see some blaming of the rich for being rich. Bad behavior knows no economic class, of course, but people with nothing to lose are more likely to express their bad behavior in desperate ways. It is reasonable to want to avoid getting in the way of such bad behavior. That avoidance does not mean that the person has no compassion, or does not do what they can to improve the world they live in. You should not make that assumption, which seems built into the comment I quoted.

I personally would not want to photograph in the New York subways as Davidson did, simply because one thing I learned growing up in a city is that city dwellers know how to build a protective space around themselves, and it's simply rude to intrude on that space. There are people who can do it--my wife is such--but I'm not one of them. I would therefore make a poor street photographer.

I went to a college that attracts people from rural areas and small towns, and it was quite a shock to realize that these country folk had no sense of personal space and made no effort to preserve it. It frankly unnerved me at first. The willingness of people to pry into that space offended me, and really it still does a bit even decades later. By the same token, that space can be a little too impenetrable, such as when a person in the city is in trouble and nobody will come to their aid as they would in a small town.

I've wandered around some really great cities, including New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, London, Copenhagen, Guadalajara,Tokyo, and even Sao Paulo, among many others. Of these, contrasting London and New York seems to me most interesting. London has a human scale to it, as if it was designed by normal-sized persons who walk around on their own feet. New York, by comparison, looks as though it was designed by giants. Everything has outgrown the human scale. A person can feel like a person in London, but in New York a person feels very small indeed. It is intimidating, and being intimidated by it is a reasonable response. By the same token, I can see how people would come to love it, the same way, say, West Virginians feel secure in their steep rural hollows that would be claustrophobic to flatlanders. One can feel very private in New York, even in the middle of a crowd.

As a young adult (not too distant from the time Davidson was making these photographs), I traveled to Washington for the first time. I was on a limited budget and was staying in a cheap chain hotel on New York Avenue in Northeast. Definitely not a good neighborhood! Nobody knew what "gentrification" meant in those days. I had spent the day photographing on the Washington Mall--just typical tourist stuff--with my Canon F-1. I thought I'd save on the cab fare and walk back to my hotel. What's a couple of miles? I went about ten blocks, stopped in a McDonalds for a burger, and realized that my camera was attracting all sorts of attention. Should I have just ignored the hair on the back of my neck standing on end as a typical paranoid tourist reaction? Even the paranoid can be the victims of those who wish to do them harm. I took a cab.

Rick "thinking Davidson's great photographs should spur open and calm discussion, not prejudice and insults" Denney

Just wanted to reiterate here what I said to you by personal message while this thread was closed down. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this.

[Two23]

I personally would not want to photograph in the New York subways as Davidson did, simply because one thing I learned growing up in a city is that city dwellers know how to build a protective space around themselves, and it's simply rude to intrude on that space. There are people who can do it--my wife is such--but I'm not one of them. I would therefore make a poor street photographer.



I'm glad the thread was reopened. I really like to photo trains, and have no subways anywhere near me. I do go to Chicago once or twice a year and make it a point to ride the subways there, along with the Loop trains. I love them! I mostly ride at night since that's when I love to photo. On some routes I see women riding by themselves, so I don't consider it overly dangerous. There are other routes in Chicago I've been advised to keep off, day or night. I took one of those last spring and I did feel very edgy and was careful. You are correct about city people having a tightly controlled "space," and people from smaller cities like mine don't have that need and are pretty much unaware of it. While I take some precautions in Chicago, such as constantly being aware of who is within 50 ft. of me, not taking expensive photo gear out into the night, and having an escape plan, I do carefully size up photo opportunities that involve people. I like cameras that have waist level finders. :) Since I don't know Chicago really well, I don't feel that I know the dangers really well either, and that puts me on edge just a bit. (Remember, I shoot at night when the crowd is gone.)

Here's the irony. Back on the Northern Plains, I actually enjoy driving out into the very worst blizzards at night, and temps 20-30-40 below zero. I'm out there alone in the dark in mountain lion territory, taking my photos of trains. I suppose it's kinda dangerous, especially driving at night in a white out, but I just take it all in stride. I once had a guy with me from Dallas along with me one night. It wasn't even a real blizzard, just a heavy snow with a moderate wind. It was above zero (F) too. The guy was terrified! He was afraid we'd get stuck and freeze to death before dawn, or run right off the road and into a lake. (I told him not to worry about that because the lakes had two feet of ice on them and you could drive a dump truck out on them. :D ) What all this boils down to is we are comfortable dealing with dangers we know, and much less so with dangers we don't know so well. Might be another element here in that while people can be malevolent & unpredictible, nature (e.g. weather, mountain lions) can also be unpredictible but not malevolent. I feel I have some control over the bad roads as I'm a very skilled driver, and I can simply shoot a mountain lion if one threatens.

While I like the actual trains & associated physical plant the best, I am also drawn to the people. We have no passenger trains of any kind in my state, so these common commuters are quite exotic to me. I do photo people of course. I am pretty much an opportunist and will photo anything where I can make the light work. I think Davidson's true skill is salesmanship. My day job is salesrep, and I generally don't have much problem striking up conversations with strangers. A big part of my photography is getting others to cooperate by giving me permission to set up my camera & flash for my shots. While I'm a little more shy about asking "street" people to pose for me, I've been taking a lot of shots of train crews & their trains in the Dakotas (they endulge me), and also the buskers etc. that I find in the Chicago subways. (I toss a couple of $$ into their hat.)


Kent in SD

[r.e.]

Hi Two23,

If you aren't already familiar with it, and given that you appear to be a train and subway buff, you might want to check out this forum: http://www.nyctransitforums.com/forums/